Preventing US economic collapse

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Shivetya

Originally posted by: dmcowen674Hopefully if Democrats regain control the Imperialsm will stop.

You have to admit it is a Republican trait of this Nation building crap disguising oil grabbing.

Democrats are far more likely to engage in Nation Building than Republicans.

Just picking on the most previous example.

Missile attacks versus Afghanistan
Missile attacsk versus Sudan
Deployed Troops to Somalia
Military attacks versus Kosovo and Serbia (not approved by UN security council btw)
Invaded Haiti (over objections of Congress)
Multiple attacks against organizations inside of Iraq
Banning all trade with Iran (1995), attempts to force regime change
Increased sanctions against Cuba


Imperialism at its finest... its the American way.... thank you theodore Roosevelt!

You seem confused.

First shooting missles at a place is not nation building,
Second it was Bush's idea to deploye troops in somalia.
I don't know if restoring a democratic goverment counts nation building
Sanctions are not nation building.

So you are left with
Military attacks versus Kosovo and Serbia
Invaded Haiti

Neither really compares in scope or size to bush's failed nation building.

 

[KentPaul]

how about BAN FAT PEOPLE. it would immediately increase productivity and reduce healthcare costs, and free up large amount of disposable income from pointless spending on twinkies and mc donalds etc to more worth while spending.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: KentPaul
how about BAN FAT PEOPLE. it would immediately increase productivity and reduce healthcare costs, and free up large amount of disposable income from pointless spending on twinkies and mc donalds etc to more worth while spending.

That would mean banning...say...half of the Anandtech P&N forums crowd? Come on guys...I know you're not getting any thinner by spending so much time sitting on your butts reading P&N posts.

 

[HGC]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt
Topic Title: Preventing US economic collapse

Topic Summary: What do you think needs to be done? Is it even an issue?
You have to admit it is a Republican trait of this Nation building crap disguising oil grabbing.

I've never understood this idea. How are Republicans or the government or Bush taking any oil from anyone in Iraq or anywhere else?

Oil is a freely traded commodity, and Iraq sells it on the open market and keeps the proceeds just like any other producer. How are we taking it? Did we send it home in tankers without paying for it? No. Did we say it all belongs to Halliburton now? No.

Please enlighten me, I just don't get this idea.

 

[SiliconJon]

I see a lot of good ideas to improve our fiscal policy, but the monetary policy is the foundation upon which it is built, and it's being completely ignored.

The answer was one of the first replies. Watch this flick, it is THE best I have yet seen on monetary policy.

http://video.google.com/videop...d=-9050474362583451279

Originally posted by: yobarman
Get rid of the Federal Reserve?

How!? It took a revolution last time. Can it be done any other way this time?

 

[SiliconJon]

Originally posted by: KentPaul
how about BAN FAT PEOPLE. it would immediately increase productivity and reduce healthcare costs, and free up large amount of disposable income from pointless spending on twinkies and mc donalds etc to more worth while spending.

Good identification of a problem, horrible attempt at a resolution

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Stunt
What does the USA need to do in order to prevent economic collapse?

These are my thoughts...

1. Drastic reform of its public education system. Strict standards for science and math. Strict standards for discipline. No more coddling of students - fail them if they don't meet standards, only gives an "A" to those who are clearly excellent. Introduce competition.

2. Reform the tax system to encourage savings and discourage consumption (consumption taxes). The USA current fuels the growth of other economies like China through consumption and it does so at the expense of its current accounts.

3. Reign in government spending. Deficits are fine so long as they are financed internally. Currently, the US debt is largely being financed by China (a potential enemy).

4. Stop nation building. It is too expensive. Crush your enemies and then either take over completely or leave - no more of this infrastructure and democracy building.

Well the fact you don't live explains why you are wrong on your first three counts.

1) Leave the Educators alone, they were doing fine until Republican Government meddling.

I would repeal NCLB immediately.

2) The only reform needed is from the top not the bottom. I understand why you would target the people instead of your precious Corporations. Corporate reform is what is needed not citizen reform. But go ahead and try to manhandle the people more and see where that gets you. Oh that's right, you're not here.

3) Deficits are fine? What kind of drugs do you have up there? No wonder you would make such a great Republican.

4) This one you have right. We need to re-build America's infrastructure as well as the political system. They have managed to circumvent everything the founding fathers tried to put in place to avoid what is happening now.

 

[piasabird]

The danger is not that China is financing debt. The danger is that we purchase too many goods from one country. If we are depending on china producing so many goods from us, then if politics in china should change, then we would have to scramble to replace those goods. So we should force companies to purchase goods from more countries to diversify our suppliers to more countries in case of a large scale war. I have always thought we should try harder to purchase more goods from South America to try to show them that we like them and that we would rather shore up democracies. I think some of the companies that went down to South American countries and basically ripped them off with bad business deals did a lot to damage relations.

I think that we would be better off helping a few countries in South America than some large communist power.

 

[Mxylplyx]

Originally posted by: GrGr
Stop using 25 % of the worlds resources. Shrink the dependency on foreign oil. The lion share of the trade deficit comes from energy imports.

Shrink the military budget. It is ridiculous to have such an oversized military compared to the rest of the world. Unless you want to rule the world. Which of course the US cannot afford since it will lead to the economic collapse of the domestic economy.

In essence to prevent a US economic collapse the US has to shrink. This will not of course happen voluntarily (has it ever in history).

While our military is probably a little bloated, our military dominance contributes more to the economic progress and stability of this country than most people realize. Our military guards over our favored trading partners, sea lanes, etc. It also makes our govt bonds the most favored vehicle for foreign reserves.

 

[ITJunkie]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378
Does the purchase of stock or investments count as consumption in your view?

No...stocks and investments are savings; complete opposite of consumption.

So people with more income, who have more money to invest will be paying fewer taxes as a fraction of their income?

There can still be investment taxation. I am merely suggesting shifting the tax code to discourage wasteful spending and encourage saving. This can be done in many ways, not just cutting investment taxes. You can have more tax shelters like education savings plans, retirement savings plans, etc. Lower income taxes, lower corporate taxes (could be connected to infrastructure investment, automation, training). Basically increasing prices on goods with a sales tax and offset that revenue with cuts in areas that will encourage savings/investment.

If you reduce consumption and increase investment, how are all those companies we are investing supposed to turn a profit and make our investments grow?

Invest in equipment and improvements that don't have the required IRR (internal rate of return) to increase efficiency/productivity and profits.

You're talking about theory here. Since when has a large American corp actually done this? You see this quite a bit in the sm. bus. sector but not so much in corp. America. Lowering corporate taxes will simply mean higher profits for raiding.
Reality check time...if you want to do something really constructive, eliminate corporate welfare. Quit legislating bail outs for dumb fvck CEO's that are stuck in a 1950 business mode and sink their and their stockholders companies because they fail to react timely to a changing market. Like it or not, the "American Way" of doing business is changing and too many big corporations concern themselves with quarterly results instead of thinking longer term.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: piasabird
The danger is not that China is financing debt. The danger is that we purchase too many goods from one country.

If we are depending on china producing so many goods from us, then if politics in china should change, then we would have to scramble to replace those goods.

So we should force companies to purchase goods from more countries to diversify our suppliers to more countries in case of a large scale war.

I have always thought we should try harder to purchase more goods from South America to try to show them that we like them and that we would rather shore up democracies.

I think some of the companies that went down to South American countries and basically ripped them off with bad business deals did a lot to damage relations.

I think that we would be better off helping a few countries in South America than some large communist power.

Wow.

Force the almight Corporations??? :shocked:

The almighty God like Corporations "ripped them off with bad business deals"???

That can't be according to the resident Republicans.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378
Does the purchase of stock or investments count as consumption in your view?

No...stocks and investments are savings; complete opposite of consumption.

So people with more income, who have more money to invest will be paying fewer taxes as a fraction of their income?

There can still be investment taxation. I am merely suggesting shifting the tax code to discourage wasteful spending and encourage saving. This can be done in many ways, not just cutting investment taxes. You can have more tax shelters like education savings plans, retirement savings plans, etc. Lower income taxes, lower corporate taxes (could be connected to infrastructure investment, automation, training). Basically increasing prices on goods with a sales tax and offset that revenue with cuts in areas that will encourage savings/investment.

If you reduce consumption and increase investment, how are all those companies we are investing supposed to turn a profit and make our investments grow?

Invest in equipment and improvements that don't have the required IRR (internal rate of return) to increase efficiency/productivity and profits.

You're talking about theory here. Since when has a large American corp actually done this? You see this quite a bit in the sm. bus. sector but not so much in corp. America. Lowering corporate taxes will simply mean higher profits for raiding.
Reality check time...if you want to do something really constructive, eliminate corporate welfare.

Quit legislating bail outs for dumb fvck CEO's that are stuck in a 1950 business mode and sink their and their stockholders companies because they fail to react timely to a changing market.

Like it or not, the "American Way" of doing business is changing and too many big corporations concern themselves with quarterly results instead of thinking longer term.

Bingo :thumbsup:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt
What does the USA need to do in order to prevent economic collapse?

These are my thoughts...

1. Drastic reform of its public education system. Strict standards for science and math. Strict standards for discipline. No more coddling of students - fail them if they don't meet standards, only gives an "A" to those who are clearly excellent. Introduce competition.

2. Reform the tax system to encourage savings and discourage consumption (consumption taxes). The USA current fuels the growth of other economies like China through consumption and it does so at the expense of its current accounts.

3. Reign in government spending. Deficits are fine so long as they are financed internally. Currently, the US debt is largely being financed by China (a potential enemy).

4. Stop nation building. It is too expensive. Crush your enemies and then either take over completely or leave - no more of this infrastructure and democracy building.

Well the fact you don't live explains why you are wrong on your first three counts.

1) Leave the Educators alone, they were doing fine until Republican Government meddling.

I would repeal NCLB immediately.

2) The only reform needed is from the top not the bottom. I understand why you would target the people instead of your precious Corporations. Corporate reform is what is needed not citizen reform. But go ahead and try to manhandle the people more and see where that gets you. Oh that's right, you're not here.

3) Deficits are fine? What kind of drugs do you have up there? No wonder you would make such a great Republican.

4) This one you have right. We need to re-build America's infrastructure as well as the political system. They have managed to circumvent everything the founding fathers tried to put in place to avoid what is happening now.

1) Leave the Educators alone, they were doing fine until Republican Government meddling.

The education system became broken when the new wave of learning came into focus - Brought on by the liberal "methods" in the 60's

Self gratification replaced the basic three R's.
Public schooling was being turned taking care of students instead of teaching them. Coddling was encouraged.
NEA started to control how teaching was taught and when.

The NCLB is a result of people realizing that the children are not being taught enough/properly. The flaw is that the incorrect accountability is being used and the wrong carrot.

[q[]

2) The only reform needed is from the top not the bottom. I understand why you would target the people instead of your precious Corporations. Corporate reform is what is needed not citizen reform. But go ahead and try to manhandle the people more and see where that gets you. Oh that's right, you're not here.
[/quote]

Get rid of the corporations and see who will have employment. Corporate reform is another term for playing Robin Hood. Socialism can destroy an economy.
At what point do you determine what is a corporation? - Number of employees, revenue, stock, etc?

Large corporations need to change their mindset to think long strategic term rather than quarter by quarter. That requires a shove by the stock holders who then have to not worry about reflections in their holdings.

Allowing corporations to stand on their mistakes will also require the willingness to let the employees of such company reap the consequences. Forcing a company to fail will smarten up the white collar management but can also but 10-20x that number of people out on the street. Think of the political outcry on that.

A complete mindset change from within the financial world is needed which will then trickle down to the person in the street. Accepting the consequences of ones choices and moving on, even if life seemed to dealt you a losing hand.

3) Deficits are fine? What kind of drugs do you have up there? No wonder you would make such a great Republican.

Deficits can jump start an economy. The Dems have had a hand in running deficits as well as the Repubs. To get rid of an deficit, you either have to cut spending or grow the revenue. Politicians are unable to cut spending; therefore it takes time for an economic stimulus to grow the extra revenue that is needed to eliminate a deficit.

 

[fskimospy]

The best thing about conservatives saying that the new methods suck and that we should get back to the 3 R's... is that only one of the 3 R's actually starts with the letter R.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
The best thing about conservatives saying that the new methods suck and that we should get back to the 3 R's... is that only one of the 3 R's actually starts with the letter R.

Where is it stated that the words should start with an R.

Once political correctness entered the picture, the quality of public education has gone down hill.

Why should higher educational schools have to teach basic math/science tokids entering the school.

That would seem to be a failure of the school sytem that they came out of. It redirects resources intended for the college to teach students that are properly prepared.

 

[SiliconJon]

http://www.financialsense.com/.../gnazzo/2005/1129.html

The ignorance of coin, credit, and circulation is unfortunately, a widespread occurrence ? causing perplexities, confusion, and distress, all tearing at the social fabric of our nation. But who is guilty of these defects ? who has caused them to be?

Is it the fault of the common man that he cannot understand the complexities of a monetary system that moved Lord Keynes to say that not one man in a million understands money?

No, the common man is not at fault, the blame lies elsewhere: it rests with those who have purposefully made the monetary policy so bizarre that even its keepers have a hard time understanding the delusion they have created.

John Kenneth Galbraith clearly understood the illusionary nature of the elite?s monetary economists when he stated that they:

?use complexity to disguise or to evade the truth, rather than to reveal it.
"

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: mfs378
Does the purchase of stock or investments count as consumption in your view?

No...stocks and investments are savings; complete opposite of consumption.

So people with more income, who have more money to invest will be paying fewer taxes as a fraction of their income?

There can still be investment taxation. I am merely suggesting shifting the tax code to discourage wasteful spending and encourage saving. This can be done in many ways, not just cutting investment taxes. You can have more tax shelters like education savings plans, retirement savings plans, etc. Lower income taxes, lower corporate taxes (could be connected to infrastructure investment, automation, training). Basically increasing prices on goods with a sales tax and offset that revenue with cuts in areas that will encourage savings/investment.

If you reduce consumption and increase investment, how are all those companies we are investing supposed to turn a profit and make our investments grow?

Invest in equipment and improvements that don't have the required IRR (internal rate of return) to increase efficiency/productivity and profits.

You're talking about theory here. Since when has a large American corp actually done this? You see this quite a bit in the sm. bus. sector but not so much in corp. America. Lowering corporate taxes will simply mean higher profits for raiding.
Reality check time...if you want to do something really constructive, eliminate corporate welfare.

Quit legislating bail outs for dumb fvck CEO's that are stuck in a 1950 business mode and sink their and their stockholders companies because they fail to react timely to a changing market.

Like it or not, the "American Way" of doing business is changing and too many big corporations concern themselves with quarterly results instead of thinking longer term.

Bingo :thumbsup:

So, by saying you agree, you agree we should stop giving government money to farmers who dont produce? Interesting coming from you...I mean...the American Way is changing afterall...

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
So, by saying you agree, you agree we should stop giving government money to farmers who dont produce?

Interesting coming from you...I mean...the American Way is changing afterall...

Try reading one of my 33,000 + posts.

I have never ever agreed with subsidies.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: blackangst1
So, by saying you agree, you agree we should stop giving government money to farmers who dont produce?

Interesting coming from you...I mean...the American Way is changing afterall...

Try reading one of my 33,000 + posts.

I have never ever agreed with subsidies.

I honestly dont want to sift through the thousands of posts of bvllshit lol

It just suprises me to see you support capitalism is all